The Story Of God [Paperback]

As a scientist Winston gives us an historical examination of what he knows to be real, the fact that humans have had a concept of what he calls the Divine Idea from pre-historic times and that persists into the scientific present.

He describes how human perception and psychology have lead to particular forms of believing and religious behaviour in various cultural contexts. However, despite having provided such rational explanations for why a religion may have adopted its particular idea of The Divine, he manages to resist making a generalised leap into reasoning about the existence of a God. He prefers to see science and religion as two totally separate ways of understanding the natural world.

There is agreement with fellow scientist Richard Dawkins on the examinable facts of what religion is and what science can tell us. Avoiding Dawkins’ anti-religious stance he seems quite deliberate in his intention to provide moderate ground. He suggests that neither science nor religion should be judged on their failures, seeing value in acknowledging good in religion; accepting it as a self-evident and inescapable part of human nature. In the same way he sees the abuse of the outcomes of science and technology as something that should not cause them to be rejected in the cause of mumbo jumbo thinking.

Had he not deliberately avoided the question of whether God exists we could have had the makings of a new genre of ‘Popular Theology’. We may do anyway. This is advocacy for science and religion that leaves it up to the reader to work the god/God bit out for themselves.

A good place to start if you are interested in the history of religion and especially of Christianity, Judaism and Islam. The book is written in a comprehensible fashion, rarely boring and at times even gripping. Unfortunately the style isn't always immaculate, and some more editing certainly would have done no harm (too many repetitions of phrases or entire paragraphs). Also, although by and large the author is careful to explain the most important points at great length, the reader is sometimes left alone when he least expects it (e.g. in the story about the schism between sunni and shi'ite muslims). Nevertheless, a must-read unless you are already well-versed in your own religion and at least one or two others.

Having watched Robert Winston's excellent BBC programme "Making Babies", I was intrigued by his venture into the science/religion debate. Winston acknowledges at the outset that his scientific position that, "humans evolved from hominids; apes that naturally stand upright on two legs" will offend some religious people. He also understands that, as a practising Jew, he holds views which many fellow scientists will dismiss as soft headed. He states his own position clearly, "I am not an atheist. I do not pretend to understand the nature of God; I do not know whether our moral code is a human construct, a piece of genetic programming or a God-given gift; I do not fully understand the concept of a soul and I have no idea whether there is an afterlife - but I am prepared to accept that God may exist." Such open mindedness brings a breath of fresh air to what is often a sterile debate.

Winston attributes the survival of humans to "our relatively large brain" admitting that, "the evolutionary causes of this....are not certain". He recognises the inevitability of conflict between those who would attribute the human brain as "a gift from God" and scientists, like himself, who believe "the similarity between our brains and those of apes make the idea of evolution irrefutable." At the same time he points out that, "of all apes, body weight for body weight, we have been the weakest, the least agile, the least fleet of foot and so - with few natural weapons - the most defenceless. With our soft, fleshy young, remaining dependent for so long upon their parents, we were the perfect snack for the many predators around us" He suggests that it was humans' ability to adapt to the environment in which they existed, coupled with their imagination, which enabled them to survive.

While Winston's argument appears strong he has to fall back on the word "probably" and other suppositions which prevent many of those of religious opinion to accept his interpretation without question. He examines a wealth of archaeological evidence to support his contention, much of which can be accurately dated, although its relationship with evolution is done by inference. This includes the suggestion that ancient people thought about God . Winston writes, "Whenever we look at the evidence for religious belief in our ancestors and antecedents, we see that it centres on the business of death and the dead." He claims, "we are wired to survive" thus dead bodies create an error message in the human psyche. Religion is one way in which humans deal with death, not in a fear of dying but in the belief that the dead are only dead physically. He draws attention to E B Tylor's view that animism and magic gave way to organised religion and eventually to science which he regards as too simplistic an explanation of religion.

Winston's knowledge of the subject is extensive and, while he is not an expert in the field, he does provides a balanced account of the Bible and the three main monotheistic religions. He clearly understands the intermix of politics and religion which has led to the rise of fundamentalism as a means of restoring traditional values. This was a theme seen in the messages of the Old Testament prophets. Jesus, who Winston accepts is an historical figure, provided a somewhat different view by emphasising commitment over ritual. Winston also traces the doctrinal and political schisms which occurred within the three large monotheistic religions arguing that the good in each should not be " hijacked by a few people who have confused bigotry and fanaticism with religion and a blind denial of moral behaviour with God." Irrespective of one's own theological beliefs Winston provides a well balanced potted account of each religion, including the way in which science emerged as a competitor for knowledge as a result of the decline of traditional loyalties in the wake of the Renaissance and Reformation.

He covers a range of scientific/religious conflicts and, while he lauds Dawkins's ability as a scientist, criticises him for believing that religion is the expression of sickness within the human psyche. If so, Winston argues, "why does he suppose (this) will vanish with the abolition of religion." In other words the behaviour arising from some religious beliefs is not necessarily symptomatic of religious belief alone. The notion that the ends justify the means is not confined to religion and applies equally to some who hold no such beliefs.

At the height of the debate on stem cell research Winston found himself the subject of attacks from religious quarters and even his Roman Catholic secretary was put under pressure to refuse to do his work - which she laudably resisted. While disagreeing with some of Winston's assumptions, interpretations and conclusions, I recommend this book as a splendid read. Personally I learned some new historical information and am more fully informed about the nature of stem cell research. Winston ends his book as he started it from a position of uncertainty. Neither religion nor science produce evil it is the uses to which each is put, especially when based on an unjustifiable certainty, that creates such evil. Winston argues it is the search for ultimate answers that gives meaning to life and his personal account of that search is interesting even if incomplete. Five stars.